Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

T-Mobile-Sprint Deal Runs into Resistance from DOJ Antitrust Staff

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 30 posts

Re: T-Mobile-Sprint Deal Runs into Resistance from DOJ Antitrust Staff

#21

Post by [deleted] »

mdasen wrote: post #12
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should have investigated the ATT->Cingular->ATT re-acquisition because the whole divestiture and reacquire scheme made no sense when cellular was clearly a growth industry a telecoms company would want in on. It had to be a scheme to hide something nasty on the books that conveniently disappeared in the shuffle.

It wasn't hiding something nasty. First, AT&T didn't divest and re-acquire. The AT&T that you know today isn't the AT&T that sold off AT&T Wireless. For a little telecom history... AT&T (the long-distance company) owned AT&T Wireless and other ventures like AT&T Broadband (which was sold to Comcast). AT&T Wireless eventually got bought by Cingular which was a joint-venture of SBC and Bell South (two local telcos). AT…

[deleted]

Re: T-Mobile-Sprint Deal Runs into Resistance from DOJ Antitrust Staff

#24

Post by cowkingdeluxe »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #3
stock_toaster wrote: post #2

That's unexpected. Given all the mergers that seemed clearly bad for consumers lately, I figured the current administration was basically "rubber stamping" everything.

The DOJ blocked the T-Mobile-ATT merger a few years back. That turned out to be really good for consumers as T-Mobile afterward introduced a lot of really nice initiatives.

ATT had to pay $3b in cash to T-Mobile due to the failed merger as a penalty for it failing (part of the contract). That probably helped.

Re: T-Mobile-Sprint Deal Runs into Resistance from DOJ Antitrust Staff

#25

Post by techntoke »

gotenyama wrote: post #22

I guess staying at the trump hotel didn't help them much.

I've stayed away from them after that and a terrible experience dealing with their customer support in regards to a warranty for a phone that stopped charging where they tried billing me for the phone and wouldn't return the old one.

Re: T-Mobile-Sprint Deal Runs into Resistance from DOJ Antitrust Staff

#26

Post by joecool1029 »

metildaa wrote: post #17
carnagii wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if they deny it the only possible reason is to f--k foreign (in particular german) companies to favor US ones. sprint is practically dead now and t-mobile is doing fine but they would certainly be more competitive and would be able to offer a more competitive wireless market to consumers if they had deeper capital and a larger customer base for the transition to 5G. John Legere is denying the story https://www.cnet.c…

Doubtful, T-Mobile has shown it is quite profitable without Sprint, taking on Sprint's debt and assets will force T-Mobile to act like a classic telecom company much moreso than they already do. T-Mobile is only interested in buying Sprint for their 120Mhz of 2.5ghz spectrum, as they would be able to use that to build a 5G network with much wider spacing (similar to Clearwire's spacing every 16 blocks) versus Verizon…

> T-Mobile is only interested in buying Sprint for their 120Mhz of 2.5ghz spectrum

Sprint is the one doing the buying. Rather, Softbank.

If T-Mobile wanted to acquire a cheaper shitbag company for spectrum, there's no better target than DISH since they have been squatting on 75mhz of AWS-3 nationwide with nothing to show for it.

But DISH's spectrum situation is going to time out next year and then we will see if the FCC actually does anything.

Network sharing won't happen. Sprint built a weird network, they are already doing an upgraded 2500mhz deployment supporting the 5G stuff as well as their current TDD-LTE devices: https://news.samsung.com/us/sprint-samsung-5g-ready-massive-...

FYI, if this plan falls apart Sprint gets a T-Mobile roaming deal out of it. Who knows what the cost is though. AT&T charged TMUS like $17/MB to roam in early days of their breakup deal on B-IV WCDMA.

Re: T-Mobile-Sprint Deal Runs into Resistance from DOJ Antitrust Staff

#27

Post by carnagii »

metildaa wrote: post #17
carnagii wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if they deny it the only possible reason is to f--k foreign (in particular german) companies to favor US ones. sprint is practically dead now and t-mobile is doing fine but they would certainly be more competitive and would be able to offer a more competitive wireless market to consumers if they had deeper capital and a larger customer base for the transition to 5G. John Legere is denying the story https://www.cnet.c…

Doubtful, T-Mobile has shown it is quite profitable without Sprint, taking on Sprint's debt and assets will force T-Mobile to act like a classic telecom company much moreso than they already do. T-Mobile is only interested in buying Sprint for their 120Mhz of 2.5ghz spectrum, as they would be able to use that to build a 5G network with much wider spacing (similar to Clearwire's spacing every 16 blocks) versus Verizon…

Profitable, but still only $40B in revenue compared to $126B for Version, and only $4B net profit compared to $30B for Verizon. Verizon's net profit is closer to T-Mobile's total revenue. https://s22.q4cdn.com/194431217/files/doc_financials/2017/an... https://www.verizon.com/about/sites/default/files/2017Verizo...

That is not a sustainable competitive position in a capital intense industry.

Spectrum is part of the deal but hardly the only one. Retail consolidation would be a big cost savings. Refinancing Sprint's debt ($40B) with T-Mobile's better credit ratings would save hundreds of millions per year in interest expenses. CAQ for mobile customers is very high, so Sprint's customer base is worth quite a bit.

The really important question is how the deal will affect the competitive landscape for 5G. Neither Sprint or T-Mobile have the scale to effectively compete on 5G and Sprint in particular is in bad shape due to their low credit ratings and high borrowing costs. If T-Mobile doesn't merge with Sprint, either a larger company does, or Sprint continues to circle the drain with low-value services and slowly dies.

If Sprint loses customers then all else being equal this benefits AT&T/Verizon more because, if those customer migrate in proportion to existing market share, they get more of them. So Sprint going down weakens T-Mobile's competitive position.

Whether or not merging with Sprint actually improves T-Mobile's competitive position depends on execution but there is at least a plausible story there.

At this stage of the industry the opportunities for competition at the infrastructure level are limited and regulators should be focused more on maintaining a competitive market for MVNOs that are offering differentiated products like Google Fi and cheap pre-paid options like Mint.

Re: T-Mobile-Sprint Deal Runs into Resistance from DOJ Antitrust Staff

#28

Post by carnagii »

joecool1029 wrote: post #26
metildaa wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doubtful, T-Mobile has shown it is quite profitable without Sprint, taking on Sprint's debt and assets will force T-Mobile to act like a classic telecom company much moreso than they already do. T-Mobile is only interested in buying Sprint for their 120Mhz of 2.5ghz spectrum, as they would be able to use that to build a 5G network with much wider spacing (similar to Clearwire's spacing every 16 blocks) versus Verizon…

> T-Mobile is only interested in buying Sprint for their 120Mhz of 2.5ghz spectrum Sprint is the one doing the buying. Rather, Softbank. If T-Mobile wanted to acquire a cheaper shitbag company for spectrum, there's no better target than DISH since they have been squatting on 75mhz of AWS-3 nationwide with nothing to show for it. But DISH's spectrum situation is going to time out next year and then we will see if the…

> Sprint is the one doing the buying. Rather, Softbank.

It is a merger, but Softbank will get a smaller stake than DT. "The new company will be about two-thirds owned by T-Mobile shareholders and one-third Sprint, with board representation in line with economic ownership, one of the people said." https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/27/t-mobile-sprint-merger-near-...

There is a decent picture about half way down in this article: https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/t-mobile-sprint-merger/

Softbank is selling at a loss here according to earlier reports that they paid $21.6B for a 72% share in Sprint https://newsroom.sprint.com/sprint-and-softbank-announce-com... and the merger values Sprint at $26.5B, of which 72% would be $19B.

Re: T-Mobile-Sprint Deal Runs into Resistance from DOJ Antitrust Staff

#29

Post by notfromhere »

runevault wrote: post #6
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DOJ blocked the T-Mobile-ATT merger a few years back. That turned out to be really good for consumers as T-Mobile afterward introduced a lot of really nice initiatives.

Yes but T-Mobile ATT is not the same as T-Mobile Sprint. letting number 3 and 4 merge is not the same as letting a top 2 eat a smaller competitor. Compared to, say, Disney-Fox this is not so dangerous for consumers most likely.

It's going to lead to higher prices just by virtue of the marketing being divided by three companies. Tmobile will need ROI and it'll get it via a noncompetitive telecom market

Re: T-Mobile-Sprint Deal Runs into Resistance from DOJ Antitrust Staff

#30

Post by notfromhere »

ulfw wrote: post #19

I bet T-Mobile regrets having ever entered the US market. They tried to sell to at&t (denied), tried to sell to Softbank/Sprint, tried to merge with Sprint. I guess they might be doomed to be where they are forever. At least the brand and network have gotten a lot better over the years.

Trying to acquire Sprint basically means they can't back out, because they'll never approve a merger when the industry will have two competitors
Post reply on HN